Excise exemption remains available despite procedural lapse where the assessee's option was otherwise evident to the Department.

Exemption under Notification No. 9/99-C.E. could not be denied for failure to file the written option under Rule 173B where the assessee's intention to avail the notification was already disclosed to the Department. The conditions in para 2 were treated as an undertaking attached to the yearly option, and once that option was exercised it could not be withdrawn for the rest of the financial year. The lapse was procedural, not substantive, so entitlement to the exemption was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 9/99-C.E. despite non-fulfilment of the conditions in para 2 to the desired extent and a lapse in filing the written option under Rule 173B of the Central Excise Rules.

Analysis: The conditions in para 2 of the notification were treated as an undertaking once the assessee exercised the option for the relevant financial year, and the option could not be withdrawn for the rest of that year. The omission to exercise the option in writing was treated as a procedural lapse, particularly because the Department was already aware from the declaration under Rule 173B that the assessee intended to avail the notification.

Conclusion: The benefit of the notification could not be denied on the ground of the procedural lapse, and the assessee remained entitled to the exemption.

---